Thursday poll: Should cops be able to test DWI suspect’s blood?

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether police can legally take blood from a person suspected of drunken driving without permission or a search warrant.

According to a story reported by Bloomberg News, authorities in Missouri argue the Constitution doesn’t require police to get judicial approval given how quickly alcohol dissipates in the bloodstream. The Missouri Supreme Court disagreed, saying officers typically must seek a warrant.

From the story:“(Suspect Tyler) McNeely was pulled over for speeding in 2010 by a state highway patrolman in southeast Missouri and refused to take a breath test after failing field sobriety tests. The officer then took McNeely to a nearby medical laboratory, where a technician drew blood over the suspect’s objection.”

So we’ll let you play Supreme Court justice this week. (No, we’re not giving you any other cases to rule on, just this one.)

Should police be able to do a blood test on a DWI suspect without permission or a warrant?

Yes, alcohol dissipates too fast in the blood to wait for a judge.

No, it's an invasion of privacy and a violation of the right against self-incrimination.

9 Responses

Maybe blanket consent needs to be provided in order to have the privilege of driving? I do not like the implications behind search without a warrant, but operating heavy equipment at high speeds is not a human right, and if people want to do that perhaps they need to give up some of their autonomy.

It’s possible to preserve a suspected drunken driver’s fourth amendment rights and obtain the time-sensitive blood test. The police take the suspect for the blood test, but before it can be used they must apply to a judge for a search warrant. If the judge deems the probable cause presented by the police to not be sufficient, the test sample and results are destroyed can can not be used as evidence.
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin

I agree with Sarah. Driving is a privilege. Too many people are killed or injured by drunk drivers. If you sign up to get a license, then you are consenting to a blood test if a police officer suspects you are driving drunk.

Not of fan of violating constitutional rights no matter how you spin it. More times than not, it’s obvious when someone has been drinking and driving. They have field sobriety tests, they have the breathalyzer as well as video and police statements. People have a right to refuse. They already have punishments in place when you exercise your rights.